History:Classical Release Artist Style
Style for determining Release Artists on *classical* Releases
- Status: This is a ProposedStyleGuideline, which has not been sanctioned yet. This StyleGuideline applies to classical music only. For popular music see the ReleaseArtistStyle.
In cases where a release contains only work(s) performed primarily by a single group or individual, credited prominently on the release, that artist may be designated the ReleaseArtist if any one of the following conditions is met:
- I remain skeptical that packaging emphasis on the perf is really important. Ultimately what matters to me is whether it intuitively makes sense to file it under a single perf/group, based on the contents and the people involved. My original language was "can be attributed to a single performer or group." - bklynd
- I think the point is that the disc is "about the performer" rather than "about the composer". This is correlated quite strongly with packaging prominence, which is why that can be a useful heuristic.
- The works are composed by different composers, and the album would otherwise be attributed to VariousArtists
- I think this is good, but not a sufficient condition without some more indication that the disc is a "recital album", i.e. "about the performer". For example http://musicbrainz.org/album/0736d1a9-d49d-49c5-bd9b-9ccbe9fc296e.html would not qualify. -DavidGibson (dwg)
- The tracks on the release, while all composed by one composer, are parts of multiple works, several of which are not present in their complete form or are drawn from different groups ("selections" or "highlights")
- No, IMHO this should remain under composers, they are still more important than performers, no matter what. --ClutchEr2
- The work(s) have all been arranged, remixed, or otherwise substantially modified by the primary performer
- - Rather than these various and somewhat difficult to interpret conditions, perhaps we would be better off illustrating the distinction with a batch of examples. With any luck looking at those would let people calibrate their intuitive notion of whether the disc is "about the composer" or "about the performer". I suggest http://musicbrainz.org/album/0736d1a9-d49d-49c5-bd9b-9ccbe9fc296e.html as an example "no" (should be Various Artists). http://musicbrainz.org/album/ffe54355-eaa6-4bf2-ae26-52ff652a4b03.html as an example "yes" (should be listed under performer). http://musicbrainz.org/album/29bec347-00f6-405c-978e-bd4d65f1b89c.html as an example border case which we should decide one way or another before this becomes an official guideline. http://musicbrainz.org/album/0212b044-3497-426e-9afd-52bc5e76bbae.html an example of case (3). - DavidGibson (dwg)
In the first case, the album should be entered with
- the composers as the TrackArtist
s for each of the tracks (unless the third case applies)
- the performer as the ReleaseArtist.
In the second case, the album should be entered with
- the composer as the TrackArtist for each of the tracks (unless the third case applies)
- the performer as the ReleaseArtist.
In the third case, the ClassicalStyleGuide does not really apply. We are now more likely in the field of Jazz, electronic or popular music. Therefore the album should be entered as a single artist release with
- the performer as the ReleaseArtist
- the composer(s) should be attributed only by AdvancedRelationships of the ComposerRelationshipType either to the whole album (if there is only one composer), or the individual tracks (if there are several composers).
- I think your first assertion here is unwarrented. Jazz or electronic music based on classical is one likely case, but see the example I've suggested above where the music is untouched but Peter Schickele adds a narration, which I think qualifies for case (3). -DavidGibson (dwg)
- This point seems like it could be more explicitly worded. From my understanding, we don't want new "collaborative groupings" (such as "Herbert von Karajan & The Berlin Philharmonic.") -bklynd